Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 04/22/2004MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. April 22, 2004 For Reference: Linda Stanley, Chair 493-7225 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison 226-4824 Sarah Fox, Staff Liaison 221-6312 Board Members Present John Long, Ken Moore, Linda Stanley, Mandar Sunthankar, Cherie Trine, Nancy York Board Members Absent Everett Bacon, Jim Dennison, Katie Walters Staff Present Natural Resources Department: Lucinda Smith, Brian Woodruff Guests None The meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m. Air Quality Plan • York: I think the discussion about Transportation Demand Management (pg 1-3) is overstated. It paints a rosier picture than reality. • Stanley: I really like the "Reward results — not programs" section. • Stanley: I was not sure how pollutant priorities fit into the policies of the plan. • Smith: The policies are generally laid out according to source priorities. We should show which pollutants are addressed by the strategies. Maybe we should also try to estimate magnitude of impact, too. But that is harder to do with broad 5-year strategies. • Stanley: I would like to see this, but you are right they are so general. • Long: Which greenhouse gases were considered in the pollutant ranking? • Smith: The prioritization process didn't call out any specific greenhouse gases but considered them all together. But City actions focus on carbon dioxide and methane. • York: I had a question about "Point, Area, Other". This didn't make any sense, and some of the percentages seemed off. • Smith: It was hard to find comparable inventory categories for different sources. But I agree it could be improved. I will look back to see how Brian handled this 10 years ago. I will try use categories such as "Commercial and Industrial" and "Home and Other", instead of "Point, Area, Other". • Stanley: Will this lead to better choices for strategies? • Smith: Not necessarily, but we can improve the clarity of this table, and include the headings in the glossary. • York: The air quality vision says "the City will invest in transit, walking, and cycling capacity and encourage residents to use alternative modes..." I'd like to have the City Air Quality Advisory Board 6/16/2004 Page 2 of 4 document capital investments in these areas each year. And ridership. I could see a graph about this. It would be great if it was in retrospect, too. • Smith: This is a good suggestion. We can add this to the Indicators list. I think much of this data is already compiled anyway. • York: Since one of our objectives is to encourage alternatives, then this should be an indicator. • Smith: It might be difficult to separate; there might be some overlap. • Woodruff. I bet the transportation department has some of this info. Since the way we make the City more attractive for non -vehicle modes is to invest in them, I think it is a fair comment — to show the non -vehicle investment over time. • York: The Transportation Master Plan has it already divided. • Stanley: It still bothers me that the air quality principle says "... as the city grows". I would prefer is said, "even as the city grows", so that the assumption about growth is not locked in stone. I know it's a City Plan policy, so it may be difficult to change. • Smith: You as a Board still have a choice to make that recommendation. • Woodruff: The city is growing and will continue to until there is no more room. • Trine; Well, unless everything crashes. • Stanley: I think Policy AQ-1.5 should include price mechanisms with incentives. They are not necessarily one in the same. • Woodruff. Incentives are not always economic. The idea about price mechanisms are covered in the Plan, it's just whether you want to clarity this. • Smith: I think it's doable to clarify this by adding price mechanisms. • Stanley: I am glad to see Principle Aq-2 on VMT and population. • Stanley: I think Policy AQ-14.2 should say will encourage "and may regulate" ozone reductions. • Smith: If we (or Denver) violated the standard in 2007, the whole SIP process would be invoked, and more regulations would be passed at the State level. In the absence of that, I don't think the City would regulate. But we COULD, according to the policy on preferred approaches. • Woodruff. I would prefer that we don't talk about how we will do it, but just rely on the preferred approaches policy — which we will apply as appropriate. • Smith: There is some inconsistency in how principles and policies are handled. AQ-13 says the City will "employ strategies that support". We did this because we have less influence over industrial sources. Maybe the principles should just state "the City will reduce" and allow the preferred approach to apply as appropriate. • Trine: I like it. • Smith: Our previous policies were more cryptic and direct, the City will reduce..." • Stanley: This gets more to rewarding results, not strategies. • Woodruff: It is a more pure approach to say this is what we want to accomplish (principles) and this is how we will do it (policies). • York: Then you'll have to look at AQ-12 as well. • Smith: I think we should toughen up the principles so they say "will reduce" and the policies can be more specific and say how we will do it. • Stanley: How about `will employ incentive programs and other strategies" • York: Why isn't radon called out? • Woodruff: The Indoor Air Quality policy implies radon. Air Quality Advisory Board 6/16/2004 Page 3 of 4 • Stanley: Well, other policies say wood smoke and ozone, why not radon? • York: It's not ranked high priority. • Smith: We don't call out secondhand smoke either, but the City will continue to take action because of the law. There was no specific reference to indoor air pollutants in the old plan either. • Woodruff: There are radon strategies in the implementations section of the plan. • Trine: The way its written makes it sound like exposure to indoor air pollution is always a choice, and it's not always. • Smith: How about "the City will take actions to reduce residents exposure" and allow the preferred approach to apply as appropriate. • Stanley: I'd like to se price mechanisms included in 16.3 • Trine: I don't think the Poudre Health Services District and the Health Department should be giving the City advice if they are separately going to be giving their own recommendations because it's like double-dipping. There should be a sentence saying they will only give advice if they are not making a separate recommendation. We think there is a lot of input happening, but it's all the same groups. • Moore: That's why we decided on the language of a "diverse range of health professionals". • Woodruff: We are not granting new authority to health professionals by asking advice, and we are not setting up a new committee. • Trine: They have authority implicit in their titles. • Woodruff: I feel uncomfortable saying that we can't be in partnership with you and if you will provide input to Council in other avenues. Thus far, we have just asked if they have any comments on our work plan and whether it is compatible with their objectives. • Stanley: I'm not sure about calling out specific groups in a City policy, but I see your point. • Smith: It might be more appropriate for the broad to consider a separate recommendation to Council on this issue. The policy is intended to be broader. • Stanley: This could be a first amendment issue; we can't limit what people say. • Smith: Staff would not support a policy that calls out specific groups names • Woodruff: We are working in a marketplace of ideas. Council looks at all the ideas and forms their opinions. • Long: I don't know if there is a place for this in policy, but when some specific issues come up, we should rally and take action to advise a more democratic way to select a task force. • Smith: That could be a multi -board effort, since it is a broader concept that goes beyond air quality. • Trine: There is a difference between other vested interests such as developers, and health professionals, who are seen as looking out for the public interest when they aren't. • Stanley: We will need to come back to this issue. • York: There is big difference between the high goals in the plan and the implementation. It will be hard to get there. • Stanley: I'd like to see implementation as well as development of the Sustainability Action Plan (pg 4-2). • Stanley: Let's reword the peer cities strategy to use the results to improve Fort Collins VMT. • Smith; This would go under actions on VMT (not measurement). • Stanley: I am concerned that diesel is not specifically called out in the plan when it is such a known health issue. I'm not sure what the City can do. Au Quality Advisory Board 6/16/2004 Page 4 of 4 • Smith: The City can address fuels, technology controls, and behaviors (exposure). I have been thinking abut a diesel task force to look at the issue in Fort Collins. • Stanley: I have seen a lot of idling vehicles lately. • Long: The key is using idling reduction technology to retrofit old vehicles to reduce idling emissions. • Long: I brought this info about greenhouse gas emission reductions from biodiesel. • York: The task force could look at off -road as well as on -road. • Smith: I didn't want to pre-empt the selection of an air toxics topic, but Mobile HAPS and PM2.5 were identified as high priority pollutants. • Stanley: Wood smoke emission rose in that latest citizen survey. I see more wood -burning in my neighborhood this year. If it continues to rise from its low point, the City should require removal of non -certified woodstove when homes are sold. • York: I see retailers selling bargain box wood stoves, and this will just get worse. • Stanley: The City should reduce subsidies to City employees to discourage driving. • York: This could be tied to healthy behaviors. • Stanley: I guess the existing policy (2.3) plus Principle 16 gets at this point (of City subsidy to employees). • Stanley: Should you have a specific indicator for radon, i.e. number of homes mitigated? • Smith: We did add a strategy to develop a meaningful indicator for radon. I will find out of there will be a record of passive or active, and number of new homes mitigated. • Stanley: I think we need an indicator that compares VMT to population. • Long: Biodiesel uses the gm/CO2e indicator. Could you quantify GHG benefit of biodiesel use? It would be good if there was a specific reduction target for the indicators, not just a trend. • York: Can we give leadership to land use decisions by setting some kind of standard like level of service or proximity to residents. • Smith: A diesel task force could look at the issues of risk. • Smith: The action strategies of the plan are focused on NRD, following a new City Plan precedent, but we can include transit ridership numbers as an indicator. Ken Moore made the following motion: Move that with incorporation of AQAB board comments made to date, the AQAB is generally supportive of the Air Quality Plan. The motion was seconded by Nancy York. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0. (Trine had left by that point.) Meeting adjourned 7.35PM Submitted by Terry Klahn Admin Support Supervisor 41 qww